Scientific Annals of Polish Society of Animal Production - Vol. 12 (2016), No 1, 49-62
Review article
The role of ethology in animal welfare
Agata Kokocińska1, Tadeusz Kaleta2
Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding of the Polish Academy of Sciences,
Jastrzębiec, ul. Postępu 36A, 05-552 Magdalenka; e-mail: [email protected]
2
Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Faculty of Animal Sciences,
Department of Genetics and Animal Breeding,
ul. Ciszewskiego 8, 02-786 Warsaw
1
Knowledge of the behaviour of a species makes it possible to ensure the well-being of animals raised in farm conditions, because when we know the behavioural standard we can
guarantee that at least the animals’ minimum needs will be met. Observation of animal
behaviour is the first element in assessing their physical and psychological comfort. The
main objective is to maximize production while at the same time maintaining animal welfare. However, this is often difficult and economic considerations come into conflict with
the comfort and needs of the animals. The elements of knowledge of behaviour, in addition
to ethology, i.e. the science dealing with animal behaviour, also include zoosemiotics and
cognitive science, which explain of the occurrence of specific behaviours in terms of biology
and physiology.
KEY WORDS: animal welfare / ethology / zoosemiotics / communication / behaviour
Economics and animal welfare are two essential elements accompanying animal production. Efforts are continually made to improve the quality of life of livestock animals,
but on large-scale farms this is a major problem. Maximization of production is inversely
proportional to the animals’ quality of life. As the degree of intensification of farming
increases, the decline in animal welfare becomes more severe. The key to success is to
find a golden mean, i.e. to achieve maximum production while optimally meeting animal
needs. The science of ethology enables understanding of animal behaviour, which in
turn makes it possible to ensure suitable farming conditions and meet minimum needs.
Knowledge of behaviour thus affects animal welfare (since the needs of a given species
are known), but animals’ behaviour is also an expression of their current living conditions. Observations of behavioural responses are the most reliable indicator of animal
well-being.
49
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
The aim of the study is to present the role of ethology and related sciences in determining the welfare of animals—not only on large-scale farms, but also animals raised by
amateurs and all other animals in captivity.
Historical outline and basic elements of ethology
The word ‘ethology’ derives from the Greek ‘ethos’, meaning habit or custom, and
‘logos’, i.e. ‘word’ or ‘reason’; hence ethology is the science that deals with behaviour and all related aspects. The main areas included in its scope are inherited and
acquired behaviour, adaptive aspects of behaviours, social behaviours, individual development, intraspecific interactions, and to a lesser degree, interspecific interactions.
What is most important in ethology is that the behaviour of animals is studied in their
natural environment, without human interference. The only research method here is
observation, preferably in the natural environment, because only in nature are there no
additional factors affecting the animal’s behaviour [31]. Ethology was founded by the
distinguished physician and zoologist Konrad Zacharias Lorenz, a pioneer in research
and theories on animal behaviour [29, 30], and the zoologist Niko Tinbergen, whose
book The Study of Instinct [44] was a breakthrough in the history of the science of animal behaviour and who laid the foundations for cognitive ethology [45]. In time, within
general ethology a distinction was made between comparative ethology and cognitive
ethology. Comparative ethology is the ‘prototypical’ ethology founded by Lorenz; this
was even the name of the institute he co-founded and directed in 1949-1951 (Institute
of Comparative Ethology at Altenberg) [26, 27]. It is based on comparison not only of
the anatomical structure of animals, but also of their behavioural patterns, from which
conclusions may sometimes be drawn regarding their evolution [29, 30]. Comparative
ethology is an evolutionary, ecological and psychophysical analysis of animal minds.
It focuses on animals’ way of reasoning and on their sensations and emotions. It also
investigates the existence of consciousness and self-awareness [1, 13, 14, 18, 21, 41].
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, who was interested in human behaviour, founded another branch called
human ethology, which attempts to explain human attitudes and behaviour from a biological point of view [11].
Behaviour is the complex system of an animal’s responses to signals reaching it
from the external environment or from inside the body. If we consider the anatomical
structure of the brain and the entire nervous system of vertebrates, it is clear that it is a
specific correlation system which receives sensory information from the environment
and links this response to appropriate schemata of motor responses. The sum of the
organism’s responses to a given factor constitutes behaviour. The autonomous nervous
system of vertebrates and the closely associated somatic sensorimotor system, apart
from controlling visceral functions and the endocrine system, also determines emotional and motivated behaviour, and for this reason the more developed the organism, the
more complex behaviour it displays, which is linked to the evolution of the nervous
system [27, 39].
Dethier and Stellar [7] distinguished several types of behaviour: stereotypic, instinctual and motivated. Behaviour originally consisted in a stimulus or series of stimuli
50
The role of ethology in animal welfare
inducing a response; this type of behaviour is known as stereotypic. It is said to be
innate, because it is dependent on innate characteristics of the nervous system of a given organism. Examples include the basic orienting response (preparation for fighting
or fleeing) or spatial orientation, including taxes. This suggests that even the simplest
organisms, such as protozoa, exhibit certain forms of behaviour, as at any moment they
may react to an environmental factor and may develop diverse forms of adaptation. The
more forms of adaptation they have, the more varied and less stereotypic the behaviour
is. Another example of stereotypic behaviour is unconditional reflexes, which are the
basis of the functioning of most organisms. These arise as a result of inherited traits of
the nervous system, and thus are innate and immediate. The lower parts of the nervous
system are responsible for them [7]. A more complex form, also consisting of reflexes,
is instinctual (motivated) behaviour. To explain this form of behaviour in depth we must
first analyse what instinct is. According to J. Chmurzyński, ‘instinct (Latin instinctus—stimulus, impulse) is the innate, hereditary ability of animals (including humans)
to execute a sequence of behaviours driven by impulses, triggered and controlled by
corresponding external stimuli, leading to consequences necessary for the life of the
individual or the preservation of the species’ [4]. According to Tinbergen, it is a system
of hierarchically organized nerve centres in the brain—drive centres, together with the
associated ‘releasing mechanisms’ and ‘effector mechanisms’ (e.g. motor mechanisms),
which are responsible for the manifestation of a chain of instinctual actions associated
with one biological task [44].
One of the first Polish books dedicated to zoopsychology, Psychologii zwierząt [The
psychology of animals] by Jan Dembowski, cites five points given by Ziegler which characterize instinctive behaviour:
‘1. It is inherited, which means that the impulse to act and the ability to perform the
action are innate traits of the animal.
2. It does not require prior learning by the animal.
3. It is fundamentally the same in all normal individuals of a species or breed.
4. It corresponds to the organization of the animal’s body, i.e. the normal use of its
organs.
5. It is adapted to the animal’s natural living conditions, and often to temporary changes
in these conditions, e.g. associated with seasons of the year’ [6].
According to Dethier and Stellar, for behaviour to be called instinctive it must be
1) unlearned,
2) typical for the species, and
3) adaptive [7].
The modern definition by H. Korpikiewicz states that ‘instinct is an inherited, unlearned ability (of animals and humans) to unconsciously, impulsively (‘automatically’)
perform a sequence of behaviours triggered by external stimuli, serving the survival of
the individual and the species’ [25]. This is one of the more accurate definitions, but this
concept should be used very cautiously. Dembowski notes that not all behaviours can
be ascribed to instincts because there is a fine line between such behaviour and intelligent actions, and sometimes no line at all. Although the definitions cited have much in
51
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
common, complete clarity is still lacking. Modern ethologists stress that the concept of
instinct must not be overused, because it is difficult to define the moment when instinctive behaviour begins to be intelligent, learned action. Instinctive behaviour is above
all based on motivation. We know that a given stimulus or set of stimuli acting on a
given organism may or may not cause a reaction in different situations. In order for the
reaction to occur, we must observe a certain change called an ‘intervening variable’, i.e.
a difference between two measurable parameters, in this case stimulation and response,
and an effect on the relationship between them. Sometimes a very weak stimulus is sufficient to induce a response, while at other times a whole set of strong stimuli induces
no response at all. It all depends on the motivation which directs a given organism to
achieve a goal. Following this line of thought, we can distinguish three states of animal
behaviour:
– the phase of searching for a defined goal
– behaviour directed towards the goal which has been identified
– the phase of calm following achievement of the goal [31].
A specific type of motivation is a drive, such as the sex drive or hunger. However, this
is a difficult term to apply because a drive in itself is not measurable; only the responses
to different types of stimuli can be measured. Motivated (instinctual) behaviour is thus a
certain type of drive aimed at achieving the chosen goal, which leads to a state of satiety
and calm. From a neurophysiological perspective, motivated behaviour is closely linked to
the hypothalamus, because this is where the centres of stimulation and inhibition of motivated behaviour are located. The ventromedial hypothalamus is responsible for inhibition,
so when this part is damaged inhibitory responses no longer function. In addition to the
hypothalamus numerous other factors affect motivation, both internal (e.g. hormones) and
external (experience) [31]. Instinctual behaviour can be considered to be between innate
and acquired behaviour. Over the course of evolution animal behaviours become increasingly complex, and the influence of their environment, experience or observation begins
to be visible. The type of behaviour which is modified by the learning process is called
acquired behaviour. The word ‘instinct’ is often used as a synonym of ‘innate behaviour’;
both terms refer to innate, unlearned behaviours. Currently there is a tendency to move
away from the use of the form ‘instinct’, and behaviour is limited to three forms: innate,
acquired and complex [35].
To sum up, every animal displays a certain pattern of responses which is the basis for
a description of its behaviour. Overall behaviour is the result of numerous factors, which
should be taken into account during observations. Each species has its own behavioural
pattern consisting of manifold forms of behaviour, which are assigned to a given category under investigation. This kind of structure enables us to create a basic ‘data base’
called an ethogram, which is the basic tool of an ethologist’s work [17].
Zoosemiotics as an important element of ethology
The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein said that to imagine a language is to imagine a
form of life. This is a very apt formulation, because when we learn a language we un-
52
The role of ethology in animal welfare
derstand the desires and the message sent by another person or animal, and thus we can
imagine the whole of a given form of life and the purpose of its existence.
Jakob von Uexküll was the first to draw attention to understanding of the animal world,
and devised the theory of ‘the animal as a receiver’. Every living creature has its own
world, which is deserving of understanding. His theories formed the basis for the work of
later ethologists and behaviourists, such as Thomas A. Sebeok, Gregory Bateson and Thure
von Uexküll, Jakob’s son, who improved on his father’s theory and used it in research on
psychosomatic medicine [37].
In 1963 the American linguist Thomas A. Sebeok observed that there was no word for
the continually intertwining sciences associated with behaviour, i.e. ethology, zoology
and semiotics, which are integrally linked to fields such as bioacoustics, physiology,
linguistics, and comparative psychology. To refer to animal communication and all the
sciences studying it he used the word ‘zoosemiotics’. Thus zoosemiotics can be defined
as the study of signals in the world of animals (‘semiotics’—the study of signs and signals), both between and within species. All animals are social beings having their own
characteristic way of communicating, which is the subject of this field of science [40].
According to Giuseppe Malacarne, zoosemiotics deals with the principles of animal
communication by using information theory (e.g. mathematical analysis of signals) and
communication theory. Apart from elements of traditional ethology and sociobiology, zoosemiotics deals with topics of particular meaning: 1) the nature of these individual communication channels in relation to the environment, 2) the meaning of a communication in
relation to the context in which it is emitted, and 3) the species-specific ability of animals
to create symbolic languages. On the other hand, Malacarne points out the similarity between zoosemiotics and cognitive ethology [37].
Three semiotic pillars can be distinguished: sign, code, and communication. The first
phenomenon, signification, is understood as a sign where the recipient is only a subject
taking part in semiosis (the process of using a sign in which its meaning is revealed), and
there is no actual sender. In the second pillar, coding, only the sender is the subject of
semiotics, who chooses the appropriate type of coding of the sign. In the third point, communication, we are dealing with both the sender and the recipient, where the encoded sign
has a meaning imparted to it and is interpreted [33].
Zoosemiotics is essential for analysis of animal behaviour, because by learning the mechanisms of animal communication we are able to determine their intraspecific relations
and correctly name their emotional states, which depending on the species may be manifested in very different ways.
Cognitivism as a ‘tool’ for studying animal behaviour
In order to thoroughly study and describe zoosemiotics, i.e. communication in the animal world, we should begin with an in-depth physiological analysis of the body, or
more specifically, the brain. Communication and all factors associated with it (sound,
movement, chemical, etc.) are regulated in the body’s command centre (the brain) and
are linked to the physiological processes taking place in it. The main focus here is
on specific regions of the brain which are active during a given activity, process, or
53
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
consciousness itself. The science dealing with these aspects in connection with information processing and information theory is called cognitivism [17]. This is an area of
study combining behavioural science, neurophysiology and information science, which
makes it possible to scientifically prove theories about animal consciousness and their
emotions or feelings. There are currently no studies that conclusively show what kind
of nerve activity is necessary, for example, for consciousness. In 2005 an article by
Francis Crick of the University of California in San Diego and Christof Koch of the
Allen Institute for Brain Science appeared in Philosophical Transactions of The Royal
Society B, describing the brain structure known as the claustrum as a kind of ‘orchestra
conductor’ of the brain, responsible for consciousness [5]. Crick believed that it is the
coordinator of brain function and brings together the functions of a variety of brain regions. It is the claustrum that integrates information (visual, auditory, tactile, pain, and
millions of others) appearing in different parts of the brain to create the experience we
call consciousness [5, 26, 43].
The cognitivist approach requires deeper analysis of the problem, e.g. division of
the general concept of intelligence into attention, recognition, perception of differences, category creation, spatial memory, and assessment of size and quality. In this
manner it has been demonstrated, for example, that animals are capable of creating
what is known as cognitive maps [3]. The term was first used by Edward Tolman, an
American psychologist and the creator of the idea of purposive behaviourism (neobehaviourism), who introduced the concept of latent learning [46, 47]. A cognitive map
is an individual’s knowledge of spatial and environmental relations and cognitive processes associated with coding and recalling the information making up this knowledge
[8, 19, 20, 49]. Its goal is to model manifold thought processes as precisely as possible,
especially in the context of imitating them later in creating artificial intelligence. In
the 1990s mind maps were adapted for applications of fuzzy information. Maps of
this type (fuzzy cognitive maps – FCM) are sometimes caused fuzzy decision maps –
FDM) [34, 48].
On the basis of the similar anatomical structure of the brains of different groups of
mammals, which have a central and peripheral nervous system, cognitive sciences not
only study the human brain but also use animal models. For example, brain centres
found in mice and rats are also present in the brains of humans, horses and whales. One
example is spindle neurons, which in humpback whales, fin whales, killer whales and
sperm whales are located in the same region of the brain as in humans. This region is
linked to social organization, empathy, and intuition regarding the feelings of others, as
well as rapid instinctual responses. Spindle neurons were once believed to be unique to
humans and very important in generating emotions, but interestingly, whales have more
of them than humans do [1]. Two hormones of the posterior pituitary, vasopressin and
oxytocin, are also known to play a crucial role in the process of forming attachments in
all mammals. They also play an important role in behaviour, and in particular in social
memory, and thus in forming interpersonal bonds [1]. Thus animals can be ideal models
in studies aimed at providing insight into humans.
54
The role of ethology in animal welfare
Parameters of assessment of animal welfare
There are many definitions of welfare. According to Hughes it is a state of complete mental and physical health, where the animal is in harmony with its environment
[16]. Duncan states that welfare is associated with what the animal feels [9]. Another
definition presents welfare as a state of harmony between the animal and its environment, expressed as proper physiological and mental functioning, vitality, and a high
quality of life [36]. According to these definitions we can distinguish four basic types
of indicators of the level of welfare, relating to both the physical and mental state of
animals:
– health indicators (absence of clinical disease symptoms)
– production indicators (e.g. a sudden reduction in milk yield)
– physiological indicators (e.g. stress hormones or immune indices)
– behavioural indicators (signs of pain, atypical or pathological behaviour, individual
preferences)
Another division distinguishes five groups, adding ‘zootechnical criteria’, such as the
condition of integuments, which according to the classification above are included among
health indicators [22].
Health, physiological and production indicators can be assessed on the basis of specific parameters, including clinical and laboratory diagnostics or statistical analysis.
Production indicators, such as milk yield or weight gain, and reproduction indicators
(e.g. fertility and fecundity) are very sensitive markers of animal health (and thus their
welfare) [12].
Particularly important among physiological parameters is the concentration of stress
hormones such as cortisol, cortisone, corticosterone and aldosterone (in the blood,
urine, faeces, feathers or hair). In livestock animals (pigs, cattle, horses, etc.) the main
corticoids are cortisol, cortisone and aldosterone. In birds, the most important stress
hormone is corticosterone, with a concentration 100 times greater than that of cortisol
[32]. Health indicators include a wide range of diseases, and in particular the morbidity
rate (the number of new cases in a given time period divided by the number of animals
at risk) and prevalence (the number of infected animals divided by the number of animals at risk). This group of indicators is the most objective, but requires substantial
labour input and expenditures. Behavioural indicators, on the other hand, may be the
first symptom of both physical and mental pathologies. In this case the basic tools are
observation and the ethogram describing the behaviour of the species in question. An
important element of the ethogram is the time budget, based on which we are able to
observe the first changes in behaviour which may be atypical or pathological.
The role of zoosemiotics in assessment of welfare
Zoosemiotics, as a science focusing on analysis of signals in the animal world, plays a
key role in observation and the creation of ethograms, and thus becomes the basis for
diagnosis with regard to behavioural indicators. Taking into account sensory channels
such as sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch (smell and taste can be treated jointly as
the chemical channel), we are able to precisely study the behaviour of the species.
55
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
For example, domestic cattle, a well-known and well-described species, are characterized as follows [38]:
1. Very good eyesight, responsible for about 50% of all information received by the
senses. The structure of the eye in cows may suggest that to some degree they can see and
distinguish colours such as red, orange and yellow (while colours with short wavelengths, such as green, grey and blue, are difficult to distinguish). Cattle see better at short
distances than long ones and have fairly poor accommodation capacity. Their visual
acuity is 1/50 that of humans and is better at perceiving moving objects than still ones.
Their field of vision is large, at about 330°, due to the location of the eyes at the sides of
the head. Depth perception is limited to short distances, because the images from the two
eyes only overlap to a small extent.
2. Good hearing, which is an important sense for cattle, although less so than vision.
It is helpful in detecting dangers and plays a crucial role in intraspecific communication
(e.g. warning signals), and interspecific communication as well. Optimum audibility for
cattle is in the range of 1-8 kHz, as compared to 1-4 kHz for humans. The minimum frequency that can be registered by cattle is similar as in humans, i.e. 20-25 Hz, while the
maximum is 20 kHz for humans and 35 kHz for cattle.
3. A highly developed chemical communication system, which helps to form social
bonds between the mother and calf, as well as between adult individuals in the herd, and
also affects reproductive behaviour, synchronization of oestrus, and even eating behaviour. Macrosmatic animals have two separate olfactory organs—the main and vomeronasal
organ. The latter, also known as the Jacobson’s organ, is responsible for detection of
pheromones [24, 42, 51]. In terms of olfactory sensitivity, cattle can detect smells at
much lower concentrations than humans. As regards taste, like other mammals cattle distinguish four basic tastes, enabling them to obtain information about certain properties
of food.
4. The lips of cattle perform tactile functions similar to those of hands in humans.
They are equally sensitive to tactile stimuli. The animals use them to investigate new,
unfamiliar objects. The pain sensation mechanism in cattle is similar to that of humans,
but the overt response to pain is smaller. A strong reaction to pain could attract the attention of predators.
Knowledge of the biological basis of behaviour and natural dispositions, which at
one time, in natural conditions, had a role in the fight for survival, should be used to
improve the welfare of animals, as well as their productivity [38]. By analysing the case
of domestic cattle in terms of the significance of particular sensory channels, we can
deduce what the basic needs of this species are. The knowledge that cattle use mechanisms associated with monocular vision and their memory of the size of objects to assess
distances can be used to accustom the animals to a new place, or while driving the herd.
Knowledge of the range of audibility of sounds for the species can be used to avoid
problems in this area, as there are sounds inaudible to humans that can cause anxiety
and behavioural changes in cattle. Knowing the animals’ taste predispositions we can
improve the palatability of fodder and thereby improve their feed intake. Knowing that
56
The role of ethology in animal welfare
the animal receives pain stimuli in the same manner as human beings, we can attempt to
limit these stimuli. It is possible that the capacity to process information flowing from
nociceptors through the brain and to produce pain sensations is lower in cattle than in
humans. This does not mean that they suffer less, but the psychological consequences
of pain in cattle may be smaller than in humans [38]. Considering these aspects and
analysing them in reference to the entire ethogram, we can draw conclusions about the
needs of the species. Knowing that due to their body structure cattle mainly move well
in a forward direction, primarily to obtain food and water, as well as to seek shelter,
space, the company of other animals or a sexual partner, we should guarantee them
the physical exercise necessary to keep them in good physical and mental condition.
In natural conditions ruminants take in food by grazing on pastures, after which they
digest it when they feel safe. This fact should be exploited so that the animal can better
assimilate its food. Thus in addition to food intake, rest is crucial to cattle [38]. In view
of the time budget and the fact that these animals spend their time mainly on taking in
food and on rest, excessive activity or inappropriate time proportions may be a signal of
a disturbance of mental or physical well-being.
For comparison, in poultry the main forms of behaviour are scratching the ground,
standing, walking, fluttering the wings, vocalizing, clucking, sitting off the ground
(on bushes or trees), and sand bathing. To ensure poultry at least a minimum opportunity to express their natural behaviour, even in cages variation is introduced in the
form of perches or containers with sand. It is difficult to observe changes in the time
budget of these animals, but other behavioural anomalies may occur. ‘Redirected’ behaviours often appear. These originally served other purposes, but in a stress situation
(including inadequate welfare) the animal performs them towards an inappropriate
object [22]. Caged chickens are often observed to peck out each other’s feathers (in
the absence of a substrate they can scratch), and calves given milk from buckets will
often suck on various objects or body parts, as their need to suckle is not met [22].
For pigs, the most important element of behaviour is exploring and seeking food by
rooting (as in wild boar). Piglets and fattening pigs kept on a hard surface with no
opportunity to root, and also as a result of chronic stress, bite each other’s tails and
ears out of boredom.
Other examples of pathological behaviour are sterotypies, aggression, apathy, self-narcotization, and many other mental illnesses, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Stereotypies are repeated and purposeless behaviours which are a kind of
defence system for the body. They are an adaptive mechanism protecting the animal
against the appearance of psychosomatic disorders. They can, however, be self-destructive. Apathy is a response to chronic stress stimuli and expresses a state of depression and the animal’s inability to adapt to the conditions of the rearing environment
[22]. In the case of self-narcotization, the animal becomes dependent on the release of
beta-endorphins [22].
The figure below presents the conflict between animal welfare and productivity [10].
From point B an increase in animal productivity is inversely proportional to their we-
57
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
lfare. Point E represents a state of balance between preservation of a suitable level of
welfare and the animals’ productivity.
Fig. Conflicts and choices between animal welfare and productivity [10]
Intensive systems, which are the most profitable, are not able to guarantee the five
freedoms developed by English specialists from the Farm Animal Welfare Council.
However, when we study the behaviour of animals we know what they need and how
to find the ‘golden mean’, designated in the figure by the letter E. It remains only
to investigate the signals sent out by the animals [10]. Not only does intensification
of production influence the quality of life of animals, but animal welfare also affects
the economics of production. Thus these are two aspects strongly influencing one
another.
The behaviour of the species during transport is highly significant. Transport is
strictly regulated by law in order to protect animals from negative consequences and
ensure their safety. Transport of animals can only be organized by entrepreneurs meeting statutory requirements, and the entire transport procedure is subject to control at
the national and EU level [28]. During transport animals are subjected to severe stress
associated with the change in their surroundings and the means of transport (loading
and unloading methods and associated trauma), as well as to heat stress and fatigue
58
The role of ethology in animal welfare
(during transport). Stocking density is also a significant factor (excessive density causes severe stress), as are the vehicle quality and the competence of the driver.
Another problem is slaughter of animals. The aim is to ensure that the procedure is as
fast and painless as possible. The first, most important principle is that the animal should
be put to death in a special facility intended for that purpose, so that other animals do not
witness it. We know that animals [50], as well as humans [15], are able to detect the smell
of emotions, especially those accompanying stress (fear or anxiety). Here a key problem
arises, because in order for the animal not to feel frightened before death (for it to be unaware of what is about to happen), the ‘smell of death’ would have to be eliminated [52],
which in a slaughterhouse is virtually impossible. Similarly, in the case of laboratories, in
January 2016 a requirement came into force that animals must be sacrificed in a separate
room with highly efficient ventilation. However, the problem of the scent of stress remains
unsolved for macrosmatic animals (the facility would have to be very thoroughly disinfected). Another problem, much talked about lately, is that of ritual slaughter. In Poland
there is no tradition of this kind, but shechita, i.e. ritual slaughter of animals in Judaism,
performed by a highly-trained shochet, is a necessary condition for consumption of the
meat. The Polish Constitutional Tribunal stated unequivocally that ‘The lack of permission
to subject animals to slaughter in a slaughterhouse in accordance with special methods
prescribed by religious rites is inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.
Criminal liability for subjecting animals to such slaughter is inconsistent with the Constitution’ [23]. Because freedom of religion and conscience is guaranteed by the constitution,
the Tribunal cannot prohibit ritual slaughter, as meat from an animal killed in any other
way is not kosher.
Conclusions
Knowing the needs of a species we are able to create optimal living conditions for it.
While the behaviour of livestock animals is fairly well known, wild animals, e.g. those
kept in zoos or in vivarium conditions, have not yet been adequately described. The
problem of animal welfare concerns not only livestock and zoo animals, but companion
animals as well. When pet owners lack adequate knowledge of the behaviour of a given
species, despite sincere intentions they fail to meet the animal’s basic needs. This is why
ethology is often the key to attaining a high or at least satisfactory level of welfare for
animals, while later observations of their behaviour provide information as to whether
their needs have actually been met. Thus learning a behavioural standard gives us guidelines for preparing a future living environment for animals that will meet their natural
needs, and later observations provide information about their welfare.
REFERENCES
1. BEKOFF M., 1995 – Cognitive Ethology and the Explanation of Nonhuman Animal Behavior.
[In:] Comparative Approaches to Cognitive Science. J.A. Meyer and H. L. Roitblat, 119-150.
2. BEKOFF M., 2010 – O zakochanych psach i zazdrosnych małpach. Emocjonalne życie
zwierząt. Wydawnictwo Znak, Kraków.
59
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
3. BENNETT A.T.D., 1996 – Do animals have cognitive maps? The Journal of Experimental
Biology 199, 219-224.
4. CHMURZYŃSKI J., 2009 – ”Instynkt” (pol.) encyklopedia.pwn.pl. [dostęp 16 lipca 2009]
5. CRICK F., KOCH C., 2005 – What is the function of the claustrum? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360 (1458), 1271-1279.
6. DEMBOWSKI J., 1946 – Psychologia zwierząt. Spółdzielnia Wydawnicza Czytelnik.
7. DETHIER V.G., STELLAR E., 1966 – Zachowanie się zwierząt. PWN, Warszawa.
8. DOWNS R.M., STEA D., 2011 – Cognitive Maps and Spatial Behaviour: Process and Products, The Map Reader: Theories of Mapping Practice and Cartographic Representation (ed.
M. Dodge, R. Kitchin and C. Perkins). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2011 by John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd. ISBN: 978-0-470-74283-9.
9. DUNCAN I.J.H., 1996 – Animal welfare defined in terms of feeling. Acta Agriculturae
Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science, Supplement 27, 29-35.
10. EDWARDS J.D., 2004 – The role of the veterinarian in animal welfare – A global perspective. [In:] Global Conference on Animal Welfare: an OIE initiative; 2004; feb. 23-25; Paris.
p. 27-32(b).
11. EIBL-EIBESFELDT I., 1989/2007 – Human Ethology. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
12. GAJOS E., 2010 – Dobrostan bydła mlecznego – implikacje ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe
SGGW – Ekonomika i Organizacja Gospodarki Żywnościowej 84, 123-131.
13. GRIFFIN D. R., 2001 – Animal Minds: Beyond Cognition to Consciousness, Chicago University Press.
14. GRIFFIN D.R., 2009 – Windows on nonhuman minds. [In:] Process Approaches to Consciousness in Psychology, Neuroscience, and Philosophy of Mind. Weber M., Weekes A.,
Albany, New York, State University of New York Press, s. 219.
15. GROOT J., 2012 – Chemosignals Communicate Human Emotions. Psychological Science
23 (11), 1417-1424.
16. HUGHES B.O., 1988 – Welfare of intensively housed animals. Veterinary Research 123, 33.
17. KALETA T., 2007 – Zachowanie się zwierząt. SGGW, Warszawa.
18. KINGSTONE A., SMILEK D., EASTWOOD J.D., 2008 – Cognitive Ethology: a new approach
for studying human cognition. British Journal of Psychology 99, 317-340.
19. KITCHIN R.M., 1994 – Cognitive maps: What are they and why study them? Journal of
Environmental Psychology 14, 1-19.
20. KITCHIN R.M., 1996 – Methodological convergence in cognitive mapping research: Investigating configurational knowledge. Journal of Environmental Psychology 16, 163-185.
21. KOCH C., 2008 – Neurobiologia na tropie świadomości. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Warszawskiego, Warszawa.
22. KOŁACZ R., BODAK E., 1999 – Dobrostan zwierząt i kryteria jego oceny. Medycyna
Weterynaryjna 55 (3), 147-154.
23. Komunikat prasowy Trybunału konstytucyjnego po K 52/13, http://trybunal.gov.pl/rozprawy/
komunikaty-prasowe/komunikaty-po/art/7277-uboj-rytualny/
24. KONOPSKI L., KOBERDA M., 2003 – Feromony człowieka. Wydawnictwo Naukowe
Scholar, Warszawa.
25. KORPIKIEWICZ H., 2011 – Biokomunikacja. Jak zwierzęta komunikują się ze światem.
Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
60
The role of ethology in animal welfare
26. KOUBEISSI M. Z., BARTOLOMEI F., BELTAGY A., PICARD F., 2014 – Electrical stimulation of a small brain area reversibly disrupts consciousness. Epilepsy & Behavior 37, 32-35.
27. KRZYMOWSKI T., PRZAŁA J., 2005 – Fizjologia zwierząt. PWRiL, Warszawa.
28. LIPIŃSKA I., 2012 – Problematyka prawna transportu a dobrostan zwierząt gospodarskich.
Logistyka, Instytut Logistyki i Magazynowania, nr 4.
29. LORENZ K., 1975 – Tak zwane zło. PIW, Warszawa.
30. LORENZ K., 1986 – Regres człowieczeństwa. PIW, Warszawa.
31. MANNING A., 1976 – Wstęp do etologii zwierząt. PWN, Warszawa.
32. MARĆ-PIEŃKOWSKA J., TOPOLIŃSKA P., MITURA K., 2014 – Poziom stresu wskaźnikiem
dobrostanu zwierząt. Wiadomości Zootechniczne, R. LII, 2, 36-42.
33. MARTINELLI D., 2010 – A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics: People, Paths, Ideas. Series
Biosemiotics 5. Springer.
34. MAŚLAK M., GINDA G., 2013 – Mapy kognitywne do eksperckiej analizy relacji pomiędzy
czynnikami ryzyka i ich rola w szacowaniu bezpieczeństwa pożarowego. Bezpieczeństwo i
Technika Pożarnicza 2, 23-29.
35. MEYER J.R., 2006 – Elements of Behavior. General Entomology ENT 425 http://www.cals.
ncsu.edu/course/ent425/tutorial/Behavior/
36. PISULA W., 1999 – Dobrostan zwierząt użytkowych – wybrane zagadnienia psychologii
zwierząt. Przegląd Hodowlany 1, 1-3.
37. RADOMSKA M., 2006 – Zoosemiotics as a new perspective. Homo communicativus 1,
71-78.
38. REINHOLZ-TROJAN A., 2007 – Znaczenie wiedzy o zachowaniu zwierząt w kontekście dobrostanu na przykładzie bydła domowego (Bos taurus) [W:] M. Trojan (red.). Zachowanie się
zwierząt. Przegląd wybranych zagadnień z zakresu psychologii porównawczej, s. 130-146.
39. SADOWSKI B., 2007 – Biologiczne mechanizmy zachowania się ludzi i zwierząt. PWN,
Warszawa.
40. SEBEOK T.A., 1981 – Perspectives in zoosemiotics. Walter De Gruyter Inc.
41. SHETTLEWORTH S.J., 2010 – Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior. New York, Oxford.
42. SMITH T.D., LAITMAN J.T., BHATNAGAR K.P., 2014 – The shrinking anthropoid nose,
the human vomeronasal organ, and the language of anatomical reduction. The Anatomical
Record 297 (11), 2196-2204.
43. THOMSON H., 2014 – Consciousness on-off switch discovered deep in brain. New Scientist
magazine, 05 July 2014, http://www.newscientist.com/
44. TINBERGEN N., 1951 – The study of instinct. Oxford University Press, London.
45. TINBERGEN N., 1963/2005 – Facsimile of: On aims and methods of Ethology. Origin.:
Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 20, 410-433. Tu: Animal Biology 55, 4, 297-321.
46. TOLMAN E.C., 1948 – Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review 55 (4),
189-208.
47. TOLMAN E.C., 1995 – Zachowanie celowe u zwierząt i ludzi. PWN, Warszawa.
48. TZENG G.H., CHEN W.H., YU R., SHIH M.L., 2010 – Fuzzy decision maps: a generalization of the DEMATEL methods. Soft Computing 14, 1141-1150.
49. UNGAR S., BLADES M., SPENCER C., 1996 – The Construction of Cognitive Maps by
Children with Visual Impairments. The Construction of Cognitive Maps. Ed.: Juval Portugali.
GeoJournal Library 32, 247-273.
61
A. Kokocińska et T. Kaleta
50. VALENTA J.G., RIGBY M.K., 1968 – Discrimination of the Odor of Stressed Rats. Science
9, vol. 161, no. 3841, 599-601.
51. WESSELS Q., HOOGLAND P.V., VORSTER W., 2014 – Anatomical evidence for an endocrine activity of the vomeronasal organ in humans. Clinical Anatomy 27 (6), 856-860.
52. WISMAN A., SHRIRA I., 2015 – The smell of death: evidence that putrescine elicits threat
management mechanisms. Frontiers in Psychology, Aug 28, 6, 1274.
62